MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128676644 · doi:10.1080/03091920500489748

On the frictional destabilization of abyssal overflows dynamically coupled to internal gravity waves

2006· article· en· W2128676644 on OpenAlexafffund
Gordon E. Swaters

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGirton College, University of Cambridge
KeywordsInternal wavePhysicsAbyssal zoneInstabilityGravity currentCoupling (piping)WavelengthGeophysicsMechanicsGeologyOpticsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the immediate vicinity of a sill, abyssal overflows can possess current speeds greater the local long internal gravity wave speed with bottom friction and downslope gravitational acceleration playing a dominant role in the dynamics. The transition to instability is described of supercritical frictional abyssal overflows on a super-inertial time scale (where rotation, and hence along slope motion, is secondary), but where there is dynamic coupling between the overflow and gravest-mode internal gravity waves in the overlying water column. It is shown that dynamical coupling with ambient internal gravity waves leads to a significant ‘up or blue spectrum’ shift in the frequencies, wavelengths and growth rates as compared to an instability theory without dynamical coupling. For oceanographically relevant parameter values, the most unstable mode has been found to have a wavelength of about 484 m, an e-folding amplification time of about 13 min, a geostationary period of about 17 min and propagates in a retrograde manner with a co-moving period of about 19 min.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical & Astrophysical Fluid DynamicsSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207